Driving Institutional Change with Evidence and Research

The romanticized archetype of the lone visionary is deeply embedded in leadership culture. We routinely celebrate stories of charismatic leaders who post catchy Instagram and TikTok videos, ignore expert consensus, follow a mysterious inner compass, and somehow strike gold. However, when we strip away the cinematic polish of these narratives, empirical reality paints a drastically different picture. For every administrator who guesses correctly based on a hunch, thousands crash their organizations into a wall because their intuition was actually just a reflection of personal bias, a familiar habit, or a craving for the spotlight.

True institutional growth requires moving beyond individual feelings and establishing an environment in which change is systematically guided by verifiable research and empirical evidence. In the fields of education, healthcare, and organizational management, research serves as the primary map for navigating complex human systems. It provides a baseline of what has been scientifically proven to work across diverse populations, sparing leaders from the costly mistake of constantly reinventing the wheel.

When an organization relies on peer-reviewed research and systematic evidence, it moves away from a culture of trial and error and moves toward a culture of predictable progress. This grounding is essential because driving organizational change is a resource-intensive endeavor that demands significant time, capital, and emotional energy from every stakeholder involved. When a leader asks their staff to leave their comfort zones and take on new burdens, they owe it to them to ensure the strategy is built on facts rather than an unverified trend or an administrative whim.

Anchoring initiatives in rigorous evidence shifts the entire nature of organizational authority. When decisions are justified by objective data and validated external studies rather than personal power or opinion, leaders build immense credibility. Change ceases to feel like an arbitrary top-down mandate and instead becomes a logical, shared response to a documented reality. This shift depersonalizes professional friction, transforming workplace dynamics from an adversarial struggle into a collaborative problem-solving effort guided by verifiable truth.

Let’s look at an example. An absolute requirement for empirical grounding is especially evident within structured frameworks such as Multi-Tiered System of Supports initiatives. While the theoretical architecture of these frameworks is sound, real-world execution often falters when leaders conflate structural compliance with functional implementation. Research demonstrates that organizational models often stall when systems prioritize abstract frameworks over responsive, evidence-based practices tailored to local contexts (Levin & Datnow, 2012). Many organizations find themselves trapped in a cycle of passive dashboard observation, treating software metrics as simple warning indicators while lacking the operational layers needed to execute meaningful, immediate next steps.

When data collection functions merely as a tool for bureaucratic documentation rather than active intervention, the frontline workforce experiences severe cognitive strain. Teachers and practitioners are forced to analyze fragmented data streams in isolation, resulting in paralyzing daily decision fatigue as they try to craft customized solutions for each individual in their care. This siloed analytical pressure is a primary, documented contributor to workplace burnout (Marsh & Farrell, 2015). Professional exhaustion is rarely a product of workload volume alone; rather, it is exacerbated when professionals must navigate disconnected administrative expectations without clear, scientifically validated protocols. To safeguard staff well-being, leadership must implement centralized systems that translate raw diagnostic data into direct, empirical responses.

Transitioning to a data-enhanced culture requires specific tools that act as the connective tissue between raw analytics and actual intervention. Platforms like Parthion fulfill this precise need by serving as a central mechanism for evidence-based decision-making to support students with diverse learning needs. By utilizing this tool to combine academic, behavioral, and social-emotional insights into a single view, leaders can synthesize empirical findings into a coordinated strategy. From an evidence perspective, Parthion reduces individual cognitive load by mapping objective student data directly onto established pedagogical interventions, replacing clinical guesswork with validated solutions. This comprehensive integration ensures that organizations base their daily adjustments on robust patterns rather than isolated data points, moving smoothly from a data-rich environment to an action-rich reality (Halverson et al., 2007).

Sustaining any major organizational shift requires an intersection of leadership humility and rigorous evaluation. Leaders must possess the courage to treat their strategic plans as hypotheses to be tested by objective outcomes rather than sacred directives that cannot be questioned. When an institution explicitly links systemic research with its internal operational data, the entire nature of professional collaboration changes. Staff members stop guessing their way through complex tasks in isolation and instead operate within a transparent, evidence-based network that values measurable progress over empty compliance (Fernandes, 2019). Moving beyond passive dashboards allows organizations to honor their staff's dedication while delivering the precise, reliable support required for long-term success.

Fernandes, R. (2019). Data-driven decision-making and its impact on institutional culture. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(3), 242–259.

Halverson, R., Grigg, J., Prichett, R., & Thomas, C. (2007). The New Instructional Leadership: Creating data-driven instructional systems in schools. Journal of School Leadership, 17(2), 159–194.

Levin, J. A., & Datnow, A. (2012). Visualizing data use: How school leaders interpret and use data for instructional improvement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(2), 179–217.

Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). How guidance contexts shape teacher data use in secondary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(2), 266–296.

Return on Instruction (ROI) Revisited

The pursuit to improve never ends and nor should it. With all of the disruption we see as a result of the 4th Industrial Revolution, changes to how we educate kids have to be considered. The result has been districts, schools, and educators making a great deal of investment in an array of ideas, strategies, and solutions with the goal of improving learning for all kids. Obviously, this makes sense, and I am all for it. However, caution must be exerted when there is an urge to purchase the next “silver bullet” or embrace ideas that sound great on the surface but have little to show in terms of evidence of improvement at scale. Results, both qualitative and quantitative, matter, and this is something that everyone should be mindful of.

Over the years, I have not shied away from discussing the need to align ideas and strategies to research as well as evidence that shows in some way that there is an improvement in student outcomes. Seems fair and reasonable, right? You would think so as the teacher and principal in me know full well that results matter, especially when dealing with increased mandates, initiative overload, limited time, and lack of money. Herein lies why the allure of the “next best thing” is so compelling, and everyone is so quick to jump on the bandwagon. Just because something sounds or looks good doesn’t mean that it is, plain and simple. This applies to what is seen on social media, in marketing assets, and at conferences. Being a critical consumer is more important than ever. I’d even go as far as to say that it is our duty, something I elaborate greatly on in Digital Leadership. 

However, it is essential to go beyond just the consumption aspect as outlined above and be just as critical during the implementation phase. A sound strategic plan, not online focus, on where you want to go and how you will get there, but also a set of measures for success and a determination of how things went. A few years back I tackled this through strictly a technology lens and brought forward the concept of a Return on Instruction (ROI); borrowing from the term “return on investment” synonymous with virtually every profession.  In retrospect, this was shortsighted and not encompassing of all the many competing and complementing elements that are pursued simultaneously. Below is my evolved take:

 "When investing in technology, programs, professional development, and innovative ideas, there needs to be a Return on Instruction (ROI) that results in evidence of improved student learning outcomes." 

If you take a look at my original post, you will see that evidence comes in many forms, not just data. The bottom line is why make an investment to improve teaching, learning, and leadership but have nothing to show for it? That would prove to be quite frustrating, to say the least. To be clear, I am not talking about fluffy ideas or opinions, but actually substantive changes to practice that lead to real change. So how can you determine an ROI? Some guiding questions that might help are below:

• How have instructional design and pedagogy changed?
• How has the scaffolding of both questions and tasks changed?
• How have student work and products changed?
• How has assessment changed?
• How has feedback changed?
• How has the use of data changed?
• How has the learning culture changed?
• How has leadership changed?
• How has meeting the needs of students who need specialized supports changed?
• How has professional learning changed? 

The questions above will be answered differently as each district, school, and educator is unique as well as the respective culture. The key is to think broadly about financial and time investments to determine if in fact, they are paying off. Both are important. Another aspect to consider is realism. In the end, results matter.

Are You a Critical Consumer?

Digital literacy is more important now than it has ever been.  The exponential evolution if the Internet and social media tools have allowed for the quick sharing of knowledge, ideas, images, videos, and opinions.  The result has been a double-edged sword.  In one respect everyone with a  smartphone has instant access to information at any time and from anywhere. I for one love the fact that I can get up to the minute news, sports scores, and weather in the palm of my hand. However, there is a downside that is beginning to plague society. We have seen an influx of misinformation, claims of “fake” news, inaccurate facts, distortion of the truth, broad claims, doctored results, and opinions with not much substance behind them.  Now more than ever we must not only teach our kids to be critical consumers of digital content, but we must also model the same. 

The education space is not immune to some of the prevalent issues and challenges described above.  This is not to say that amazing ideas and strategies aren’t being shared. In fact, I for one benefitted greatly as a principal when I learned about something shared on social media and then either implemented or adapted it in a way that bolstered the transformation efforts at my school.  Case in point.  As we explored moving towards Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) in 2010, I was able to glean powerful insights and evidence of efficacy from the Forsyth County School District in Georgia. The content they shared included policies, procedures, pedagogical techniques, and professional development, but more importantly, tangible improvement results.  Motivated and inspired I then began to seek out research and more examples of successful implementation that aligned with our goals while addressing specific challenges.

Going BYOD sounded like a great idea based on what I had either read or saw online. However, not everything I consumed addressed the realities we faced as a school. Some of were too “fluffy” or not practical.  It is important when reading a blog post or article to look beyond what in theory sounds good, but in practice might not lead to improvement.  Going beyond surface level opinions and ideas is really at the heart of critical consumption.  Since many of my queries when out through Twitter at the time that is how I received the majority of the information for consumption. As more and more tools and pathways have emerged to allow educators to share it is incumbent upon all of us to take a more in-depth look so that something isn’t done just for the sake of doing it or because it sounds really good.  

“Just because something sounds good on Twitter or looks good on Pinterest doesn’t mean it is an effective practice.”

The quote above has really helped ground my approach to what I consume and then ultimately use to improve professional practice.  It also extends well beyond social media to articles, books, keynotes, workshops, and presentations. We must acknowledge that with all of the great ideas and strategies there is an equal amount that just isn’t very good regardless of the hype surrounding them. By not good I mean that there will be difficulties in either implementing at scale or showing, not just talking about, better results.  To assist in taking a critical lens to what we see or hear consider the following questions:

• Why is this idea or strategy good for my classroom, school, district, organization or professional growth?
• How will it positively impact learners beyond just engagement?
• Does it align to peer-reviewed research?
• Is it realistic given culture, budgetary, demographic, socioeconomic, and facility challenges?
• What qualitative and quantitative measures can be used as evidence to validate whether or not it is effective at improving outcomes? 
• How can it be sustained and scaled?

Sharing will not and should not stop. Becoming a connected educator changed my entire trajectory thanks to what I was and continue to be able to glean from my Personal Learning Network (PLN) in addition an array of other means to get information discussed in this post. It is up to you to be a critical consumer to separate quality from what in theory seems like a great idea, but in practice won’t get the results that learners and educators are seeking. Sounding good just doesn’t cut it when the bold new world demands more from our learners.  

Efficacy in Digital Learning

As a principal, the buck stopped with me.  I was reminded of this by numerous superintendents during my tenure as a school leader.  However, when we began moving forward with our digital transformation one particular superintendent asked me point blank what evidence I had that actually supported our claims that new equated to better. This not only stopped me in my tracks, but that moment in time provided the grounding that my school and I really needed.  For change to really be embraced by all stakeholders it is critical that we just don’t tell and claim that improvement is occurring, but that we also show. 

Accountability matters and is a reality in our work.  We are accountable first and foremost to our learners. As a supporter of the purposeful use of technology and innovative practices, I had to illustrate how effective these strategies were at improving learning.  Statements and claims didn’t cut it and this was more than fair.  It was at this time where the term efficacy kept finding its way into the conversation and my head. In the real world of education efficacy matters and it is important that this is part of the larger conversation when it comes to digital. It is a word that, in my opinion, has to be a part of our daily vocabulary and practice. Simply put, efficacy is the degree to which desired outcomes and goals are achieved. Applying this concept to digital learning can go a long way to solidifying the use of technology as an established practice, not just a frill or add-on.

The journey to efficacy begins and ends with the intended goal in mind and a strong pedagogical foundation.  Adding technology or new ideas without this in place will more than likely not result in achieving efficacy.  The Rigor Relevance Framework provides schools and educators with a check and balance system by providing a common language for all, creating a culture around a common vision, and establishing a critical lens through which to examine curriculum, instruction, and assessment. It represents a means to support innovative learning and digital practice as detailed in the description of Quad D learning:

Students have the competence to think in complex ways and to apply their knowledge and skills they have acquired. Even when confronted with perplexing unknowns, students are able to use extensive knowledge and skill to create solutions and take action that further develops their skills and knowledge.

Aligning digital to Quad D not only makes sense but also melds with a great deal of the conversation in digital and non-digital spaces as to why and how learning should change.  A framework like this emphasizes the importance of a strong pedagogical foundation while helping to move practice from isolated pockets of excellence to systemic elements that are scaled throughout the learning culture.  It also provides the means to evaluate and reflect in order to improve. 

Rigor Relevance Framework

Once an overall vision for digital learning is firmly in place you can begin to work on the structures and supports to ensure success.  This brings me back to efficacy.  The why is great, but the how and what have to be fleshed out.  Determining whether technology or innovative practices, in general, are effective matters.  Below I will highlight 5 key areas (essential questions, research, practicality, evidence/accountability, reflection)  that can put your classroom, school, district, or organization on a path to digital efficacy. 

Essential Questions

Questions provide context for where we want to go, how we’ll get there, and whether or not success is achieved.  Having more questions than answers is a natural part of the initial change process. Over time, however, concrete answers can illustrate that efficacy in digital learning has been achieved in some form or another.  Consider how you might respond to the questions below:

• What evidence do we have to demonstrate the impact of technology on school culture?
• How are we making learning relevant to our students?
• How do we implement and support rigorous and relevant learning tasks that help students become Future-Ready?
• What is required to create spaces that model real-world environments and learning opportunities? 
• What observable evidence can be used to measure the effect technology is having on student learning and achievement?
• How can targeted feedback be provided to our teachers and students, so that technology can enhance learning?

Research

Research is prevalent in education for a reason.  It provides us all with a baseline as to what has been found to really work when it comes to student learning.  Now, there is good research and bad.  I get that. It is up to us as educators to sift through and then align the best and most practical studies out there to support the need to transform learning in the digital age. We can look to the past in order to inform current practice.  For example, so many of us are proponents of student ownership, project-based, and collaborative learning. Not only does digital support and enhance all of these, but research from Dewey, Vygotsky, Piaget, Papert, Bloom, and many others provide validation.  See the image below. For more on authorship learning click HERE.

One of the main reasons Tom Murray and I wrote Learning Transformed was to provide a sound research base that supports digital learning and the embracement of innovative practices.  The research of Linda Darling Hammond found that technology can have the most impact on our at-risk learners when it is used to support interactive learning, explore and create rather than to “drill and kill”, and constitutes the right blend of teachers and technology. This is just one of over 100 studies we highlight. Then there is the comprehensive analysis by John Hattie on effect size – a listing of the most effective instructional strategies that improve student learning outcomes all of which can be applied to digital learning. If efficacy is the goal, embracing a scholarly mindset to inform and influence our work, not drive it, is critical.

Practicality

All of what we do should align to the demands, and at times constraints, of the job.  This includes preparing students for success on standardized tests. If it’s not practical, the drive to implement new ideas and practices wanes or never materializes.  The creation of rigorous digital performance tasks that are aligned to standards and the scope and sequence found in the curriculum is just good practice. All good performance tasks include some form of assessment, either formative or summative, that provides the learner and educator with valuable information on standard and outcome attainment.  Again, this is just part of the job. 

The Rigor Relevance Framework assists in creating performance tasks that engage learners in critical thinking and problem solving while applying what they have learned in meaningful ways.  There is also natural alignment to incorporating student agency. This is exactly what so many of us are championing.  My colleague and good friend, Weston Kieschnick, has created a template that combines research and the practical aspect of performance task creation to assist you in creating your own.   Check it out HERE. You can use the template and go through the process of developing a rigorous digital performance task or just use it to inform as you design your own. 

Evidence and Accountability

As many of you know I do not shy away from openly discussing how important this area is. Just go back to my opening paragraph in this post for a refresher. Evidence and accountability are a part of every profession and quite frankly we need more of both in education to not only show efficacy in our work but to also scale needed change. Not everything has to or can be, measured. However, focusing on a Return on Instruction allows everyone to incorporate multiple measures, both qualitative and quantitative, to determine if improvement is in fact occurring. 

Reflection

When it is all said and done the most important thing we can all do is constantly reflect on our practice.  In terms of efficacy in digital learning consider these reflective questions from your particular lens:

• Did my students learn? 
• How do I know if my students learned? 
• How do others know if my students learned? 
• What can be done to improve? 
• What point of view have I not considered?

Amazing things are happening in education, whether it be through digital learning or the implementation of innovative ideas.  We must always push ourselves to be better and strive for continuous improvement. The more we all push each other on the topic of efficacy, the collective goals we have for education, learning, and leadership can be achieved. 

Be the Example

“The world is changed by your example, not by your opinion.” – Paulo Coelho

Change is hard.  I have been writing about this fact for years now.  It becomes even harder when we are not modeling the expectations that we set for others. This was the case for me early on during my days as a principal.  When it came to technology and innovation, I was great at telling others what they should be doing. After getting on Twitter in 2009 I realized that we had to be better for our kids.  As such I did what I was trained to do and what I thought was the most logical course of action to get buy-in from my staff.   I drafted memos and emails that provided guidance and examples.  I spent a great deal of time writing numerous detailed memos on everything from technology tools to improve assessment, developing a Personal Learning Network (PLN), and embracing innovative ideas. Then I waited.

The wait for any sort of change was never-ending.  I probably would have been still waiting if I hadn’t grabbed a teacher I had a good relationship with and asked him why no one was embracing all these new ideas and strategies I was pushing out. He was pretty blunt and to this day I am indebted to him. Basically he told me that no one was integrating technology or implementing innovative ideas because I wasn’t doing any of it myself.  His words and simple advice provided a great lesson in leadership.  

Asking others to do what we are not doing, or have not done, ourselves doesn’t lead to meaningful change. Research supports this claim. James Kouzes and Barry Posner have researched the topic of leadership for over 30 years looking at thousands of leaders in a wide range of industries throughout the world. Below are some key takeaways in relation to being the example:

Eloquent speeches about common values are not nearly enough. Exemplary leaders know that it’s their behavior that earns them respect. The real test is whether they do what they say; whether their words and deeds are consistent. Leaders set an example and build commitment through simple, daily acts that create progress and build momentum.

The personal-best projects we studied were distinguished by the fact that all of them required relentless effort, steadfastness, competence, and attention to detail.  It wasn’t the grand gesture that had the most lasting impact. Instead it was the power of spending time with someone, of working side-by-side with colleagues, of telling stories that made values come alive, of being highly visible during times of uncertainty, of handling critical incidents with grace and discipline, and of asking questions to get people to focus on values and priorities.

Leadership is not about telling people what do to, but instead taking them where they need to be. Setting an example through your own practice illustrates to others that change is a shared endeavor. It is about the collective where a title, position, and power don’t give someone a pass.  When it all is said and done leadership is about action, not talk and opinion (or memos and emails in my example). Setting an example and modeling are the first step. The next is a combination of support, accountability, and evidence that leads to efficacy. When everyone sees how the change(s) actually improve teaching, learning, and leadership the path to sustainability is started.

In my case I began to learn how to use certain technology tools after which I made myself available to then train my staff after school. I made my learning through a PLN visible and used the new acquired knowledge and skills during training sessions, faculty meetings, observation post-conferences, and evaluations.  The practice of modeling expectations actually strengthened the emails encouraging my staff to improve their practice. Over time change took hold and evidence of improvement bolstered our resolve to keep pushing the envelope. Together we were then able to show efficacy aligned to technology use and innovative ideas. 

Take time to reflect on whether or not your words are supported by appropriate actions.  Change is a collaborative process if it is to be successful.  Showing others that you are not just willing to learn, but how changes to practice actually improve teaching, learning, and leadership can and will have a lasting impact. Evidence matters and when aligned with the example you set no goal is out of reach. In the end it’s not about what is said, but what is done.  Be an example that empowers others to change.

Own What You See

As a former science teacher I was always a fan of the scientific method.  It was a great process for students to actually do science in order to learn by designing an experiment to deeply explore observations and develop/answer questions.  The process itself was guided by inquiry, problem solving, and reflection. I fondly remember developing and testing out numerous hypotheses in the many science courses I took in high school and college. This type of learning was messy, unpredictable, and challenging, but it was also fun.  I think I refuted more hypotheses then validated, but the learning experience kept driving me to pursue eventual degrees and a teaching certificate in the sciences. 

Even though my science teaching days are long behind me, the scientific method has always stuck with me, as there are direct applications to leadership. Leaders must constantly make observations and own what they see. In the context of education, leaders must challenge the status quo if observations lead to a conclusion that a business as usual model is prevalent.  What is seen, or not, can be a powerful tool to develop critical questions that can drive needed change or improvement. 

This is extremely important regarding instruction.  As a leader do you really know or have a good handle on what is happening in your classrooms daily? Does your school or district work better for kids or adults? How do you know if technology and innovative practices are actually improving learner outcomes? Owning what you see requires improving observation and evaluation practices. The first step is to get into classrooms more to not only make observations, but to also begin collecting evidence that either validates or refutes the claims of improvement that are now heard more and more.  Getting into classrooms both formally and informally can provide a much-needed critical lens to support professional practice while also building powerful relationships in the process.

Owning what you see doesn’t just have to come from being physically present to make observations. Developing strategies to ensure a return on instruction through the collection of standards-aligned artifacts (lesson plans, projects, student work) and portfolios can clearly illustrate whether changes to professional practice are occurring or not.  Making observations and looking at evidence (or lack thereof) can lead to more questions that can drive change. This is a good start, but ultimately owning what you see requires action that results in improved outcomes. The more we can quantify this through multiple measures the better our chances are of initiating sustainable change that improves learning for all.

When you look around your building(s) or classrooms what do you see?

Return on Instruction (ROI)

"When integrating technology there needs to be a Return on Instruction (ROI) that results in evidence of improved student learning outcomes." - Eric Sheninger

For educational technology to be fully embraced as a powerful teaching and learning tool there must be a focus on substance over assumptions and generalizations.  There is a great deal of evidence to make educators reflect upon their use of technology. The most glaring was the OECD Report that came out last fall. Here is an excerpt:

"Schools have yet to take advantage of the potential of technology in the classroom to tackle the digital divide and give every student the skills they need in today’s connected world, according to the first OECD PISA assessment of digital skills. Even countries which have invested heavily in information and communication technologies (ICT) for education have seen no noticeable improvement in their performances in PISA results for reading, mathematics, or science."

This week I came across a post by Larry Ferlazzo that asked educators to provide their response to why EdTech has over-promised and under-delivered. Before even reading this post, I already began to develop some of my own answers based on my work and observations of schools all over the world. This response stood out from the second part of Larry’s piece:

"Good teaching is not about where or what to click.  Good teaching is about building quality relationships with students, helping students make connections to the real world, building students individual cognitive networks, and having our students enjoy learning for the sake of learning.  Technology will never solve all the ills of education! Nor should it! So what is the biggest problem in EdTech?  The biggest problem is that we have been teaching teachers and students how to use technology without giving them the why of technology.  We have mistakenly believed that giving teachers and students new software or a new box will help fix education."

Image credit: http://artisanauctions.com/

I agree that part of the problem has been a lack of focus on why technology should be integrated.  As the OECD Report alluded to, the problem isn’t the technology per say, but the lack of quality professional learning to support educators with effective implementation.  There needs to be a greater focus on instructional design, digital pedagogical techniques, and the development of better assessments aligned to higher standards.  I am proud to say that this is the foundation of our digital work at the International Center for Leadership in Education (ICLE). It is important to note that this dilemma is not only specific to technology, but innovation as well.  There has to be a concerted focus on the why, how, and evidence of results. 

In addition to professional learning, we also have to be more critical of what we see and hear when it comes to educational technology.  For technology to be taken seriously as a tool to support and enhance teaching and learning then we must no longer accept assumptions and generalizations as to what it actually does. I for one want students empowered to own their learning, create artifacts, to demonstrate conceptual mastery, use their voice, be responsible in online spaces, and connect with the world in authentic ways.   From an educator perspective I also want teachers and administrators to utilize technology and innovative practices to improve teaching, learning, and leadership.  However, the principal in me also needs to balance this with clear results. This is a reality for every teacher and administrator that cannot be ignored.  It is important to show how students apply what they have learned in relevant ways aligned to the highest levels of knowledge taxonomy. Telling just doesn’t cut it anymore.

The next step is to begin to connect this to results that prove beyond assumptions and generalizations that technology is playing a role to positively impact teaching and learning. It is important to remember that if teaching, learning, and leadership don’t change, technology and innovation will never have the type of impact that is expected. Consider these four areas of evidence:

• Data:  Now let me start off by saying that this is only one indicator of success. The key is to be able to align various data sources to technology use or initiatives. Standardized test scores have the greatest ability to illustrate to stakeholders how technology is positively impacting learning and achievement. Please take a look at this study by the University of Buffalo. It shows how Lockport City School students in a 1:1 iPad environment experienced significant achievement gains.  Read the entire piece as it explains why achievement increased.  Other data sources include graduation rates, acceptances to four-year colleges, attendance rates, discipline referrals, and levels of authentic student engagement. In terms of engagement make sure that it is actually leading to learning. Understand though that not all data is good data and that we should not be obsessed with this. However, saying it does not have any importance is unrealistic.  
• Observations/Evaluations: To really see if teaching, learning, and leadership are changing, administrators have to get in classrooms more. As principal my teachers had a combination of five of these each year (3 unannounced observations, mid-year evaluation, end of year evaluation). In addition to this, my entire leadership team and I conducted non-evaluative walk-throughs each day. We can't forget that building leaders can use just as much support as teachers. Administrators are in desperate need of more quality feedback in relation to their role in digital implementations.
• Artifacts: Examples of digital lessons, projects, assessments (formative, summative, rubrics, etc.) curriculum, and student work that aligns with higher standards. Blog posts were a great way for me to showcase examples of these artifacts. Here is an example of a teacher using Instagram and the standards-aligned rubric. My teachers aligned artifacts to their observations to support not only what happened during the observed lesson, but also what happened before and after.  All of these artifacts were aligned to standards found in the McREL tool we used.  By the end of the year, all observation comments and artifacts populated into each teacher’s end of year evaluation giving me a body of evidence that clearly showed whether teaching and learning were actually changing. Each teacher wound up with a portfolio.
• Portfolios: Educators (teachers and administrators) and students can demonstrate evidence of growth and improvement over time in relation to learning goals. Everyone seems to talk about portfolios quite often, but I rarely see examples aligned to student and professional standards. 

Technology can and will have an impact on learning if and only if there is a focus on substance.  We must move past our infatuation with apps, tools, taglines, catchy sound bites, and broad claims that are not supported by either research or evidence of improvement. All educators should be able to answer the following question - How do you know that technology is impacting student learning and professional practice? Within this response should be examples of substance.